User:Uberkatze12/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Computer Supported Cooperative Work

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This is the article assigned to our class.

1. Lead
Guiding questions:

· Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
The definition given by the article may be too broad, and likely still needs more work.

· Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
No, the lead does not include the article's major sections.

· Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
One example is that the lead discusses the effects of Covid on CSCW, but this is not further discussed in the article.

· Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
Overall, the lead contains a definition which is more detailed than is helpful. It would be beneficial if it was more to-the-point.

· Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Yes: "Computer-supported cooperative work is a groundbreaking interdisciplinary research area" (bold my own). This implies the importance of CSCW, which is a non-neutral position.

Additionally, while I agree with the sentiment, the following sentence seems as if it is trying to persuade rather than inform: "By enabling developers to be more aware of the differences and difficulties facing women in CSCW design, more progress can be made in allowing women to be effective users of CSCW systems through sharing and voicing opinions."

The rest of this section appears well-written however.

· Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
Not all facts in the article are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information.

· Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
ex. Yes, the sources provided are thorough.

· Are the sources current?
There is a mix of current and older sources, ranging from 1980s - 2021. This feels appropriate given the topic.

· Check a few links. Do they work?
All twelve of the links I checked worked. This is a better state than the article on Software Engineering is in.

· Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
The article could use work to make it more concise and better worded.

· Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
Yes, when needed, but none more than needed. The pictures are effective for their purpose.

· Are images well-captioned?
Yes, for their purpose.

· Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
They are laid out in an understandable format.

· How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
It is rated as a start-class on the projects quality scale. It is listed as important for WikiProject Computing, WikiProject Internet, WikiProject Business, and WikiProject Human–Computer Interaction

· What is the article's overall status?
Overall, I would describe the article as "scattered"

· What are the article's strengths?
The article covers a lot of topics in a decently in-depth manner.

· How can the article be improved?
A more coherent grouping of sections, as well as more references for sections without references would be beneficial.

· How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
I would call the article poorly developed, but not in regards to amount of content.